Case against ex-Sergeant a ‘frame job,’ lawyer says

'In response' letter to the editor for Nov. 23, 2013

I am the attorney who represented Lt. Martha Sainz in her appeal of her proposed termination from the San Diego Police Department as outlined in the Nov. 18 U-T Watchdog article “S.D. sergeant up for promotion had been near termination.”

I was an SDPD officer for 11 years, and I have been an attorney representing police officers for more than 20 years. I know a frame job when I see one, and this was a frame job ginned up by personal animosity and professional jealousy.

The case against Martha was dropped because it simply was untrue that she attacked and battered another officer in 2005. In keeping with the long tradition of water play at a summer camp, Martha got wet sitting on a sponge and then she got the other officer wet with the same sponge. That was it. Martha did not punch her or choke her.

We interviewed more than 30 witnesses and took the depositions of another 20. Their statements were compared to what was written in the Internal Affairs investigation. The investigation turned out to contain outright lies, exaggerations and hearsay. The investigation was a fraud and that is why the SDPD dropped the charges. The reason the case went as far as it did is because of personal animosity by some of the witness officers and the Internal Affairs sergeant who conducted the investigation.

The anonymous rank-and-file officers who complained about the promotion either are unaware of the facts of the case or are some of those we established had lied about what happened that day. Most were known to be lazy and incompetent, the exact opposite of Martha. She is entitled to the well-deserved promotion to lieutenant.

In fact, if the taxpayers of this city were aware of her high quality of police work, they would be impressed and thankful she is on their side.